Red Panda Update from Karma Airguns
- Thread starter DonnyFL
- Start date
Very good post. I tried for a patent once, and there are several factors in play that I think very few people are considering or aware of. I didn't even get past the patent lawyer research phase. It's grueling, and the US Patent Office does NOT issue patents without exhaustive investigation. If it's clear that someone else was the originator of the idea, they don't issue the patent. You must prove you originated the idea. That said, what the public may consider to be a very benign difference in the design, the Patent Office may consider to be a significantly/functionally different and patentable idea or design. So, for whatever reason, the US Patent Office saw fit to issue FX the US Patent for the design in question.
The other thing to consider is a patent holder has an obligation to protect the patent granted, or they risk losing the patent protections. It appears FX responded exactly as they needed to in order to protect their rights afforded by the patent. Regardless of how you feel about a company, if their patent protection is being threatened or violated, they typically have to respond in a protective manner, or risk forfeiting some or all of their unenforced patent protections.
Possibly a little more to consider here than meets the eye initially.
Upvote 0
But then other legitimate manufactures are & have already been producing such a design trait ... It's a pretty sad day when such an event is allowed to happen.
Yes there will be blood behind the scenes as other manufactures are going to be cost millions in fighting this patient and defending there AG's design already in production etc ...
Yes there will be blood behind the scenes as other manufactures are going to be cost millions in fighting this patient and defending there AG's design already in production etc ...
Upvote 0
The first one to get the patent wins.
Others used the design first but failed to secure the rights?
To bad, so sad.
Others used the design first but failed to secure the rights?
To bad, so sad.
Upvote 0
I see what you're saying, Scott, and I empathize with it. I am not knowledgeable enough to do much more than i already have, and that's just trying to illustrate the Patent Office sometimes issues patents on things it interprets as different when the common public sees them as the same. Also, that in order to not have to fold, a company's hand can be forced into patent protection enforcement.
It is a shame. The legal landscape is littered with good companies that may have been legally sound in their actions or positions, but just simply couldn't afford the cost of fighting the fight. That alone is probably one of the most successful legal strategies for winning a legal contest, regardless of whether the winner is right or wrong.
It is a shame. The legal landscape is littered with good companies that may have been legally sound in their actions or positions, but just simply couldn't afford the cost of fighting the fight. That alone is probably one of the most successful legal strategies for winning a legal contest, regardless of whether the winner is right or wrong.
Upvote 0
Little guy can't afford the fight, just how the system works unfortunately. Right or wrong, it all depends on your position. All we can do is hope that Karma turns this negative into a positive. That's a trademark of a good company that's willing to move forward thru adversity. Sure seems like that's what they are doing.
Upvote 0
Scott,
I understand the feelings but there has to be a line of some kind and current law says that this is that line.
I would support any of you all that applied for a patent and someone walked over it and copied your idea.
Upvote 0
That's what they are doing and they are doing it gracefully, with dignity.
That will go a long way with sales and reputation.
Upvote 0
Remember when FX did the same thing to Daystate on the Ghost hammer spring adjuster claiming it was the same design they had. Made Daystate hold back on the Ghost and send out replacements. Don't you guys know FX is the only game in town and people better stop copying their ideas. Notice no one has copied the barrel liner system yet.
Upvote 0
So a question ...
If one owns a manufacturers AG that utilizes an over barrel air tank/plenum and received it and has been using it prior to this patient, does it make it illegal to own or possess ? ... can it be resold ? ... Is it now a Collectors Gun becoming more valuable over time becoming a RARE and unique piece of AG history ?
This is a Legitimate question to ponder
If one owns a manufacturers AG that utilizes an over barrel air tank/plenum and received it and has been using it prior to this patient, does it make it illegal to own or possess ? ... can it be resold ? ... Is it now a Collectors Gun becoming more valuable over time becoming a RARE and unique piece of AG history ?
This is a Legitimate question to ponder
Upvote 0
I will add one more thing to this....
Acquiring a patent is a Very arduous process as stated, and damned expensive..
That being said it is fairly easy to get around a design patent simply by making very minor changes to the original design...
Now the Bigger the company that holds a patent, generally has a pack of savage lawyers with nothing better to do than bury the "so called " offender enough in lawsuits to bankrupt them when defending themselves...
If I was Donny I personally would have done the same thing, and say to hell with it and just redesign the gun and move on,
Let the Bully be a Bully
Acquiring a patent is a Very arduous process as stated, and damned expensive..
That being said it is fairly easy to get around a design patent simply by making very minor changes to the original design...
Now the Bigger the company that holds a patent, generally has a pack of savage lawyers with nothing better to do than bury the "so called " offender enough in lawsuits to bankrupt them when defending themselves...
If I was Donny I personally would have done the same thing, and say to hell with it and just redesign the gun and move on,
Let the Bully be a Bully
Upvote 0
Just to clarify. I’m not a patent lawyer. Looks like USA uses first to file. Snowpeak clearly hasn’t filed for the patent and probably don’t care. So FX can take their idea and file it as their own. (Obviously a generalization) but patent law is not fair or simple. Usually money wins.
The USPTO used to grant patents to the first person to develop an invention. After the passage of the America Invents Act, it now generally grants patents to the first inventor to file for protection.
The USPTO used to grant patents to the first person to develop an invention. After the passage of the America Invents Act, it now generally grants patents to the first inventor to file for protection.
Upvote 0
Probably cheaper to pay the engineer to come up with another design which does not infringe, and which might even end up better. Spend more $$$ on research/development instead of legal.
Upvote 0
LOL - I didn't for a second think they did.
Nor was I serious about anyone paying me to be in a partnership, and I don't give a flying smh about only writing comments that "honor the decisions and/or changes made by both both parties."
What the heck???
Upvote 0
Exactly…..in another post it was mentioned about FX filing for a patent after the fact. I’m curious as to after what fact ?
Upvote 0
Tell that to the Wright Brothers. They spent their fortune defending their patent, and lost.
Upvote 0
Sadly, this is the best we have at the moment, like it or not, the patent owner has to defend it.
Don't like it? Change it.
Upvote 0
It's not hard to look up the dates on the patent. Say's they first filed on May 16th 2024.
patents.justia.com
Patents Assigned to FX Airguns AB - Justia Patents Search
Justia - Patents - Patents and Patent Application Resources
patents.justia.com Upvote 0